The kid on the outside wants to be part of the cool group, and one of the insiders starts to show some interest in the outsider. “Will you . . .” asks the insider, and the outsider waffles. “Once you start hanging out with me, folks will think you’re at least as cool as that other semi-cool kid . . . and maybe cooler” says the insider, and still the outsider waffles. Then word get out about the things the insider has been doing behind the outsider’s back, and the outsider sees how that other semi-cool kid gets treated better. And still the cool kid asks “Will you . . .” At this point in the story, you know what happens next: the outsider looks for a way to get back.

FDL readers have been working collectively on a Citizen Journalism project to transcribe interviews relevant to Wikileaks, Adrian Lamo and Bradley Manning. The transcripts have been compiled on one page, which is available now:

A conspiracy requires an agreement between two people, a partnership in crime. So far, there’s been no proof offered that Manning ever communicated directly with Assange — so how could they form a meeting of the minds? And how can U.S. Department of Justice realistically make a conspiracy charge involving WikiLeaks and Manning without this meeting of the minds?

I’m not sure why Wired editor Evan Hansen thinks FDL transcribing interviews and logging articles qualifies as “discrediting Lamo.” Lamo’s own words and actions are responsible for any indictment being made in the press, and Wired’s decision to sit on the chat logs makes them an active participant in whatever claims Lamo makes about their contents.

And if Hansen doesn’t think the credibility of the key source for Wired’s reporting on this story can hold up when simply compared to his own words, I’d say they’ve got bigger problems than Glenn Greenwald.